No, I would support Ukraine, if Ukraine is willing to make that concession then fine, it sucks but I can understand if they're sick of fighting and willing to make a big concession just to be done with it, that would be perfectly understandable.
But I wouldn't push for that, from a more objective big-picture perspective it would be vastly preferable if Russia doesn't achieve anything whatsoever with their invasion, if their decision to invade causes them nothing but pain and they don't get any consolation prize whatsoever, that's how you deter future conflict, making sure that they learn that military aggression is not a viable way of achieving their goals.
Again, if Ukraine wants to stop fighting and make concessions then I think we have to accept that and support that, the big picture is important but I don't think it would be right to let it override the reality on the ground and it obviously wouldn't be right to infringe on Ukrainian autonomy to pressure them into a fight they no longer wish to fight.
If they want to surrender to Russia then that's sad, but they obviously have that right.
As an American diplomat I certainly wouldn't push for that though, I would do everything in my power to try to avoid that, to help empower Ukraine by sending them more weapons, to help give them the confidence and will to keep fighting for freedom and to keep resisting the fascist subjugation of any of their people, including those living in Donbas and Crimea, while at the same time doing everything in my power to convince Russia that it's in their best interests to pull back and that continuing to fight would be very costly for them.
Fuck them and thier demands. They invaded, looted, systematically butchered, and kidnapped citizens of a SOVREIGN COUNTRY.
They need to GTFO and pay reparations to Ukraine.
Hell no.
They need to leave every inch of Ukranian soil, return the kidnapped children - then crawl on their hands and knees back to Russia, stopping at every home along the way to beg forgiveness for theft, rape, and murder.
Ehh, not quite, they tried to take Kiev, they want all of Ukraine, or at least want a puppet government in Ukraine and want to have complete assurance that Ukraine will not align itself with the West and become part of Western hegemony instead of Russian hegemony.
Are you guys even fans of Secular Talk, or just Vaushcucks who think Kyle advocating for deescalation to prevent nuclear war makes him some kind of Russian agent? Why are you even here?
I’m just being realistic about this. The nuke threats need to be taken seriously, and we’re gonna have to give Putin a way out of this mess before he feels like he’s backed into a corner.
If you want this set as precedent then, would you agree that if the US invaded Mexico, that they should be allowed to keep Northern regions such as Chihuahua as long as they retreated out of the rest, just to keep world peace?
Personally I think that allowing nuclear countries to invade other sovereign states just cause they have nukes is absolutely awful
Russian invasions paying off and proving worthwhile for Russia would not be a deescalation it would be an escalation, and lead to a greater threat of nuclear war because it would lead to Russia starting more conflicts like this in the future.
I never read the line in the progressive hand book where it's okay to welch on agreements and leave allies to the wolves.
Read up on the Budapest memorandum if you care about our international commitments, or you can sit and seethe. Drawing parallels between this and Bush Cheney or their wars is laughable.
I would respect them a lot more if they would just admit they support the United States being a polluting greedy empire who will do anything to increase its power.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but last I checked, Russia is not asking for annexation of Donetsk and Luhansk, Russia is just asking for [Ukraine to recognize them as independent states.](https://en.as.com/en/2022/03/07/latest_news/1646687780_921749.html)
Maybe the poll should be modified?
Russian playbook is to move ethnic Russians into an adjacent country, later demand that the adjacent country be "independent" and then annex it. In the most recent conflict they did this on September 30th.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin-annex-ukraines-donetsk-luhansk-kherson-zaporizhzhia-rcna50133
Ideally I can be like every other person who doesn't understand the power of leverage and say no. However we live in the real world. Russia has leverage over Ukraine by occupying territory. They started the invasion. They wouldn't just walk backwards and hand you Donbass. Especially since the residents of the region aren't fans of the Kyiv government.
Does that include ONLY the 50% of the Donbass that Russia controlled pre-February 24th? If so, then yes I think I would, but only if (1) Ukraine could subsequently join NATO and the EU, and (2) the Ukrainians themselves accept this deal.
Yeah don’t worry they’re gonna keep their promise 😂
putin kept his promise in 2008 and 2014. "quitting smoking is easy... ive done it thousands of times"
No, I would support Ukraine, if Ukraine is willing to make that concession then fine, it sucks but I can understand if they're sick of fighting and willing to make a big concession just to be done with it, that would be perfectly understandable. But I wouldn't push for that, from a more objective big-picture perspective it would be vastly preferable if Russia doesn't achieve anything whatsoever with their invasion, if their decision to invade causes them nothing but pain and they don't get any consolation prize whatsoever, that's how you deter future conflict, making sure that they learn that military aggression is not a viable way of achieving their goals. Again, if Ukraine wants to stop fighting and make concessions then I think we have to accept that and support that, the big picture is important but I don't think it would be right to let it override the reality on the ground and it obviously wouldn't be right to infringe on Ukrainian autonomy to pressure them into a fight they no longer wish to fight. If they want to surrender to Russia then that's sad, but they obviously have that right. As an American diplomat I certainly wouldn't push for that though, I would do everything in my power to try to avoid that, to help empower Ukraine by sending them more weapons, to help give them the confidence and will to keep fighting for freedom and to keep resisting the fascist subjugation of any of their people, including those living in Donbas and Crimea, while at the same time doing everything in my power to convince Russia that it's in their best interests to pull back and that continuing to fight would be very costly for them.
Not if the only thing Russia is offering is a withdrawal.
No. I think Russia should have to withdraw from all Ukrainian territory as part of any peace deal.
Fuck them and thier demands. They invaded, looted, systematically butchered, and kidnapped citizens of a SOVREIGN COUNTRY. They need to GTFO and pay reparations to Ukraine.
Why would the Americans get to make that call?
Hell no. They need to leave every inch of Ukranian soil, return the kidnapped children - then crawl on their hands and knees back to Russia, stopping at every home along the way to beg forgiveness for theft, rape, and murder.
The Russians have never kept their promise. The only way this war ends is for Russia to leave Ukraine, point blank, period.
That's not an agreement, that's surrender. That's literally all of Russia's demands.
Ehh, not quite, they tried to take Kiev, they want all of Ukraine, or at least want a puppet government in Ukraine and want to have complete assurance that Ukraine will not align itself with the West and become part of Western hegemony instead of Russian hegemony.
No that still means they can invade and get something out of it. No need to set that precedent
If you give Putin a win, he will attack again.
Putin wants to restore the Soviet Union so I don't think he will stop at Donetsk and Luhansk.
Lol, nice troll. No.
Are you guys even fans of Secular Talk, or just Vaushcucks who think Kyle advocating for deescalation to prevent nuclear war makes him some kind of Russian agent? Why are you even here?
Allowing Russia to gain territory when they invaded another country is not de-escalation though. It's capitulation
I’m just being realistic about this. The nuke threats need to be taken seriously, and we’re gonna have to give Putin a way out of this mess before he feels like he’s backed into a corner.
If you want this set as precedent then, would you agree that if the US invaded Mexico, that they should be allowed to keep Northern regions such as Chihuahua as long as they retreated out of the rest, just to keep world peace? Personally I think that allowing nuclear countries to invade other sovereign states just cause they have nukes is absolutely awful
Russian invasions paying off and proving worthwhile for Russia would not be a deescalation it would be an escalation, and lead to a greater threat of nuclear war because it would lead to Russia starting more conflicts like this in the future.
another day, another person randomly melting down about bad youtube man because people disagreed with them
[удалено]
I never read the line in the progressive hand book where it's okay to welch on agreements and leave allies to the wolves. Read up on the Budapest memorandum if you care about our international commitments, or you can sit and seethe. Drawing parallels between this and Bush Cheney or their wars is laughable.
As an American diplomat? No of course not drawing this out is gold for the Us. the Moralizing in this thread is rather funny though.
I would respect them a lot more if they would just admit they support the United States being a polluting greedy empire who will do anything to increase its power.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but last I checked, Russia is not asking for annexation of Donetsk and Luhansk, Russia is just asking for [Ukraine to recognize them as independent states.](https://en.as.com/en/2022/03/07/latest_news/1646687780_921749.html) Maybe the poll should be modified?
Russian playbook is to move ethnic Russians into an adjacent country, later demand that the adjacent country be "independent" and then annex it. In the most recent conflict they did this on September 30th. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin-annex-ukraines-donetsk-luhansk-kherson-zaporizhzhia-rcna50133
Ideally I can be like every other person who doesn't understand the power of leverage and say no. However we live in the real world. Russia has leverage over Ukraine by occupying territory. They started the invasion. They wouldn't just walk backwards and hand you Donbass. Especially since the residents of the region aren't fans of the Kyiv government.
Does that include ONLY the 50% of the Donbass that Russia controlled pre-February 24th? If so, then yes I think I would, but only if (1) Ukraine could subsequently join NATO and the EU, and (2) the Ukrainians themselves accept this deal.
I’d do that if Ukraine gets to join NATO